It will give you a headache if you start thinking about it. From the American media guide:

Seeding & Tie-Breaking ProceduresOverall Conference record, at the conclusion of the regular season, is used to seedteams numbering 1 through 11. If an institution is ineligible for tournament competition,all tiebreaking procedures will be followed, then the ineligible team will be removedfrom the tournament field and seeds will be adjusted accordingly in an upward manner.The following procedures are in place to establish seeding for the championship and tobreak ties. Follow the appropriate steps in order.Two-Team Tie1. Regular season head-to-head results (one or two games). If the tied teams splittheir two games, then proceed to Step 2.2. Each team’s record vs. the team or tied teams occupying the highest position in thestandings. Continue down through the standings until one team gains an advantage.When comparing records against a single team or collective tied teams (before tiesare broken), the following may apply:a. If the games played against the team or group are equal, winning percentageprevails.b. If the games played against the team or group are unequal, the followingscenarios apply:i. Most wins do prevail only if the team with fewer wins could not equal thatwin total if they played the same number of games. Two examples of manyscenarios that do provide an advantage:1) Team A 2-0 2) Team A 3-0Team B 0-1 Team B 1-1ii. Most wins do not prevail if the team with fewer wins could equal or surpassthe win total of the other team. Two examples of many scenarios that do notprovide an advantage:1) Team A 1-1 2) Team A 2-0Team B 0-1 Team B 1-0iii. Fewer losses do not prevail if the teams have the same number of wins and ifthe team with fewer games could equal or surpass the loss total of the otherteam. Two examples of many scenarios that do not provide an advantage:1) Team A 1-0 2) Team A 0-1Team B 1-1 Team B 0-2c. If an advantage is not determined, proceed to the next team or group in thestandings for comparison.d. If the tie cannot be broken after continuing down through the last team orteams in the standings, revert back to comparing records against the top teamsin order and allow winning percentage to prevail even if there is a comparison ofunequal games. Only then, if the percentages are both 1.000, is 2-0 better than1-0. However, the reverse is not true – no team gains advantage when all have a.000 winning percentage (0-1 is never better than 0-2)

That's a headache waiting to happen...but I believe someone on the AACbbs board said if Memphis finishes above UCF in the standings, SMU is #1 and if UCF finishes above Memphis in the standings, then it's Cincy.

DanFreibergerForHeisman wrote:d. If the tie cannot be broken after continuing down through the last team orteams in the standings, revert back to comparing records against the top teamsin order and allow winning percentage to prevail even if there is a comparison ofunequal games. Only then, if the percentages are both 1.000, is 2-0 better than1-0. However, the reverse is not true – no team gains advantage when all have a.000 winning percentage (0-1 is never better than 0-2)

If both teams win out, this is all that matters. Cincy played ECU and Memphis once, and SMU played UCF and USF once.

It would essentially come down to which of those four teams finished highest in conference, of which Memphis currently leads UCF by two games.

Given that the home team will likely be in the 4/5 game, the advantage of being the 1 seed instead of the 2 may be next to nothing.

UCONN is 4-1 since losing to us and they are creeping up in the standings. But, of the four wins three are against the bottom three and the other is UCF who is on a losing streak. The loss is to Cincy.

The next three will say alot about UCONN: Memphis at home and then Temple and Houston on the road...before we visit Storrs.

DanFreibergerForHeisman wrote:It will give you a headache if you start thinking about it. From the American media guide:

Seeding & Tie-Breaking ProceduresOverall Conference record, at the conclusion of the regular season, is used to seedteams numbering 1 through 11. If an institution is ineligible for tournament competition,all tiebreaking procedures will be followed, then the ineligible team will be removedfrom the tournament field and seeds will be adjusted accordingly in an upward manner.The following procedures are in place to establish seeding for the championship and tobreak ties. Follow the appropriate steps in order.Two-Team Tie1. Regular season head-to-head results (one or two games). If the tied teams splittheir two games, then proceed to Step 2.2. Each team’s record vs. the team or tied teams occupying the highest position in thestandings. Continue down through the standings until one team gains an advantage.When comparing records against a single team or collective tied teams (before tiesare broken), the following may apply:a. If the games played against the team or group are equal, winning percentageprevails.b. If the games played against the team or group are unequal, the followingscenarios apply:i. Most wins do prevail only if the team with fewer wins could not equal thatwin total if they played the same number of games. Two examples of manyscenarios that do provide an advantage:1) Team A 2-0 2) Team A 3-0Team B 0-1 Team B 1-1ii. Most wins do not prevail if the team with fewer wins could equal or surpassthe win total of the other team. Two examples of many scenarios that do notprovide an advantage:1) Team A 1-1 2) Team A 2-0Team B 0-1 Team B 1-0iii. Fewer losses do not prevail if the teams have the same number of wins and ifthe team with fewer games could equal or surpass the loss total of the otherteam. Two examples of many scenarios that do not provide an advantage:1) Team A 1-0 2) Team A 0-1Team B 1-1 Team B 0-2c. If an advantage is not determined, proceed to the next team or group in thestandings for comparison.d. If the tie cannot be broken after continuing down through the last team orteams in the standings, revert back to comparing records against the top teamsin order and allow winning percentage to prevail even if there is a comparison ofunequal games. Only then, if the percentages are both 1.000, is 2-0 better than1-0. However, the reverse is not true – no team gains advantage when all have a.000 winning percentage (0-1 is never better than 0-2)

With UConn beating Memphis by 3 at home last night, Memphis' lead over UCF is down to one game. I care a lot less about being the # 1 seed than I care about UConn being on the other side of the bracket, so tell me if they are in the 3/6 or 4/5 side and I'll tell you what I'm rooting for in terms of tiebreakers.

Stallion wrote:No. 1 seed isn't even guaranteed to play the weakest opponent-I've always questioned how the AAC does their seeding.

No. 1 seed plays the 8/9 winner but lower seeds could end up playing the 10 seed or even the 11 seed. Sad

The No. 1 seed should play the lowest seeded team that advances to the 2nd round. Difference could be substantial. Compare having to play Temple instead of USF (1-13)

I don't disagree; the NFL dynamic model is fairer. But the static model of giving the highest seed the easiest route assuming the higher-seeded team wins every game is standard in college basketball. I follow a lot of conferences and the NCAAs, and I don't think there's any that depart from this norm. I think the NIT does, maybe.

It is the same logic as the NCAA tourney. Look at from the perspective of a 15 seed. They manage to beat the two seed and their reward is to play the 1 seed? Would not seem right to me. Granted, their are geographic issues in the NCAA tourney that do not apply in a conference tourney.

Dukie wrote:With UConn beating Memphis by 3 at home last night, Memphis' lead over UCF is down to one game. I care a lot less about being the # 1 seed than I care about UConn being on the other side of the bracket, so tell me if they are in the 3/6 or 4/5 side and I'll tell you what I'm rooting for in terms of tiebreakers.

Grant Carter wrote:It is the same logic as the NCAA tourney. Look at from the perspective of a 15 seed. They manage to beat the two seed and their reward is to play the 1 seed? Would not seem right to me. Granted, their are geographic issues in the NCAA tourney that do not apply in a conference tourney.

The Difference is the First Round. No. 1 Seed plays No. 64 Seed (out of 64)

in AAC No. 1 Seed can play no better than 8/9 Seed (out of 11)

I think the No. 1 seed has earned the right to play the winner of a play-in 10/11 matchup

I'm not talking about Second Round

"With a quarter of a tank of gas, we can get everything we need right here in DFW." -SMU Head Coach Chad Morris

Grant Carter wrote:It is the same logic as the NCAA tourney. Look at from the perspective of a 15 seed. They manage to beat the two seed and their reward is to play the 1 seed? Would not seem right to me. Granted, their are geographic issues in the NCAA tourney that do not apply in a conference tourney.

The Difference is the First Round. No. 1 Seed plays No. 64 Seed (out of 64)

in AAC No. 1 Seed can play no better than 8/9 Seed (out of 11)

I think the No. 1 seed has earned the right to play the winner of a play-in 10/11 matchup

I'm not talking about Second Round

If 10/11 play in what you call the play in game (which is really the first round) then do you suggest that 8/9 play each other and 6/7 play each other, or how would you set that up? It seems to me the 6 seed has earned the right to play the 11 seed and the 7 seed has earned the right to play the 10 seed.